Search: TDS | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

Search Judgments
Browse by Bench
Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

1,357 results for “TDS”+ Section 58clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,460 Mumbai1,357 Bangalore673 Chennai461 Hyderabad346 Ahmedabad314 Kolkata311 Cochin210 Indore191 Jaipur182 Raipur172 Chandigarh161 Karnataka148 Pune142 Visakhapatnam80 Lucknow70 Cuttack64 Jabalpur64 Surat48 Dehradun36 Ranchi32 Rajkot31 Agra20 Nagpur20 Allahabad20 Amritsar16 Guwahati14 Telangana13 Patna12 Varanasi8 SC7 Jodhpur4 Calcutta4 Panaji4 Uttarakhand2 Punjab & Haryana2 Kerala1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)71 Addition to Income60 Disallowance38 Deduction37 TDS35 Section 153A27 Section 14A26 Section 4021 Section 14720 Section 115J

DCIT (TDS) 3(2), MUMBAI vs. RELIANCE LIFE NSURANACE CO. LTD, MUMBAI

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3011/MUM/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 May 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Jitendra B. SanghaviFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Singh, DR

Section 131Section 133ASection 194CSection 194DSection 194ISection 194JSection 201(1)

section 201 of the Act and AO worked out the TDS default on this account at Rs. 5,33,58

Showing 1–20 of 1,357 · Page 1 of 68

...

20

DCIT (TDS) 3(2), MUMBAI vs. RELIANCE LIFE INSURANCE CO. LTD, MUMBAI

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3010/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 May 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Jitendra B. SanghaviFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Singh, DR

Section 131Section 133ASection 194CSection 194DSection 194ISection 194JSection 201(1)

section 201 of the Act and AO worked out the TDS default on this account at Rs. 5,33,58

DCIT (TDS) 3(2), MUMBAI vs. RELIANCE LIFE INSURANCE CO. LTD, MUMBAI

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3009/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 May 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Jitendra B. SanghaviFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Singh, DR

Section 131Section 133ASection 194CSection 194DSection 194ISection 194JSection 201(1)

section 201 of the Act and AO worked out the TDS default on this account at Rs. 5,33,58

ACIT CEN CIR 22, MUMBAI vs. M.R. CONSTRUCTION, MUMBAI

In the result, in the case of M

ITA 1144/MUM/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 201Section 21Section 40Section 40a

58,858/-, Rs. 9,00,000/- being disallowance of miscellaneous expenses being repayment of advance, Rs. 14,77,884/- being adhoc disallowance of expenses incurred on Kashish Construction are emanating from seized material. He admitted that these other disallowances are adhoc disallowances and for non-deduction of TDS under various provisions of section

JAWAHAR B. PUROHIT,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 22XC, MUMBAI

In the result, in the case of M

ITA 7211/MUM/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 201Section 21Section 40Section 40a

58,858/-, Rs. 9,00,000/- being disallowance of miscellaneous expenses being repayment of advance, Rs. 14,77,884/- being adhoc disallowance of expenses incurred on Kashish Construction are emanating from seized material. He admitted that these other disallowances are adhoc disallowances and for non-deduction of TDS under various provisions of section

M. R. CONSTRUCTION,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CEN CIR 22, MUMBAI

In the result, in the case of M

ITA 790/MUM/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 201Section 21Section 40Section 40a

58,858/-, Rs. 9,00,000/- being disallowance of miscellaneous expenses being repayment of advance, Rs. 14,77,884/- being adhoc disallowance of expenses incurred on Kashish Construction are emanating from seized material. He admitted that these other disallowances are adhoc disallowances and for non-deduction of TDS under various provisions of section

M.R. CONSTRUCTION,.,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 22, MUMBAI

In the result, in the case of M

ITA 3710/MUM/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 201Section 21Section 40Section 40a

58,858/-, Rs. 9,00,000/- being disallowance of miscellaneous expenses being repayment of advance, Rs. 14,77,884/- being adhoc disallowance of expenses incurred on Kashish Construction are emanating from seized material. He admitted that these other disallowances are adhoc disallowances and for non-deduction of TDS under various provisions of section

JAWAHAR B. PUROHIT,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 22XC, MUMBAI

In the result, in the case of M

ITA 7212/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 201Section 21Section 40Section 40a

58,858/-, Rs. 9,00,000/- being disallowance of miscellaneous expenses being repayment of advance, Rs. 14,77,884/- being adhoc disallowance of expenses incurred on Kashish Construction are emanating from seized material. He admitted that these other disallowances are adhoc disallowances and for non-deduction of TDS under various provisions of section

JAWAHAR B. PUROHIT,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 22XC, MUMBAI

In the result, in the case of M

ITA 7214/MUM/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 201Section 21Section 40Section 40a

58,858/-, Rs. 9,00,000/- being disallowance of miscellaneous expenses being repayment of advance, Rs. 14,77,884/- being adhoc disallowance of expenses incurred on Kashish Construction are emanating from seized material. He admitted that these other disallowances are adhoc disallowances and for non-deduction of TDS under various provisions of section

DCIT CEN CIR 22, MUMBAI vs. M.R. CONSTRUCTION, MUMBAI

In the result, in the case of M

ITA 3645/MUM/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 201Section 21Section 40Section 40a

58,858/-, Rs. 9,00,000/- being disallowance of miscellaneous expenses being repayment of advance, Rs. 14,77,884/- being adhoc disallowance of expenses incurred on Kashish Construction are emanating from seized material. He admitted that these other disallowances are adhoc disallowances and for non-deduction of TDS under various provisions of section

ASST CIT CC-22, MUMBAI vs. JAWAHAR PUROHIT, MUMBAI

In the result, in the case of M

ITA 6848/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 201Section 21Section 40Section 40a

58,858/-, Rs. 9,00,000/- being disallowance of miscellaneous expenses being repayment of advance, Rs. 14,77,884/- being adhoc disallowance of expenses incurred on Kashish Construction are emanating from seized material. He admitted that these other disallowances are adhoc disallowances and for non-deduction of TDS under various provisions of section

DCIT CEN CIR 22, MUMBAI vs. M.R. CONSTRUCTION, MUMBAI

In the result, in the case of M

ITA 3646/MUM/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 201Section 21Section 40Section 40a

58,858/-, Rs. 9,00,000/- being disallowance of miscellaneous expenses being repayment of advance, Rs. 14,77,884/- being adhoc disallowance of expenses incurred on Kashish Construction are emanating from seized material. He admitted that these other disallowances are adhoc disallowances and for non-deduction of TDS under various provisions of section

JAWAHAR B. PUROHIT,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 22XC, MUMBAI

In the result, in the case of M

ITA 7209/MUM/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 201Section 21Section 40Section 40a

58,858/-, Rs. 9,00,000/- being disallowance of miscellaneous expenses being repayment of advance, Rs. 14,77,884/- being adhoc disallowance of expenses incurred on Kashish Construction are emanating from seized material. He admitted that these other disallowances are adhoc disallowances and for non-deduction of TDS under various provisions of section

ASST CIT CC-22, MUMBAI vs. JAWAHAR PUROHIT, MUMBAI

In the result, in the case of M

ITA 6847/MUM/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 201Section 21Section 40Section 40a

58,858/-, Rs. 9,00,000/- being disallowance of miscellaneous expenses being repayment of advance, Rs. 14,77,884/- being adhoc disallowance of expenses incurred on Kashish Construction are emanating from seized material. He admitted that these other disallowances are adhoc disallowances and for non-deduction of TDS under various provisions of section

JAWAHAR B. PUROHIT,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 22XC, MUMBAI

In the result, in the case of M

ITA 7208/MUM/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 201Section 21Section 40Section 40a

58,858/-, Rs. 9,00,000/- being disallowance of miscellaneous expenses being repayment of advance, Rs. 14,77,884/- being adhoc disallowance of expenses incurred on Kashish Construction are emanating from seized material. He admitted that these other disallowances are adhoc disallowances and for non-deduction of TDS under various provisions of section

M.R. CONSTRUCTION,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CEN CIR 22,

In the result, in the case of M

ITA 3709/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 201Section 21Section 40Section 40a

58,858/-, Rs. 9,00,000/- being disallowance of miscellaneous expenses being repayment of advance, Rs. 14,77,884/- being adhoc disallowance of expenses incurred on Kashish Construction are emanating from seized material. He admitted that these other disallowances are adhoc disallowances and for non-deduction of TDS under various provisions of section

M.R. CONSTRUCTION,.,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 22, MUMBAI

In the result, in the case of M

ITA 3711/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 201Section 21Section 40Section 40a

58,858/-, Rs. 9,00,000/- being disallowance of miscellaneous expenses being repayment of advance, Rs. 14,77,884/- being adhoc disallowance of expenses incurred on Kashish Construction are emanating from seized material. He admitted that these other disallowances are adhoc disallowances and for non-deduction of TDS under various provisions of section

JAWAHAR B. PUROHIT,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 22XC, MUMBAI

In the result, in the case of M

ITA 7213/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 201Section 21Section 40Section 40a

58,858/-, Rs. 9,00,000/- being disallowance of miscellaneous expenses being repayment of advance, Rs. 14,77,884/- being adhoc disallowance of expenses incurred on Kashish Construction are emanating from seized material. He admitted that these other disallowances are adhoc disallowances and for non-deduction of TDS under various provisions of section

JAWAHAR B. PUROHIT,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 22XC, MUMBAI

In the result, in the case of M

ITA 7210/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 201Section 21Section 40Section 40a

58,858/-, Rs. 9,00,000/- being disallowance of miscellaneous expenses being repayment of advance, Rs. 14,77,884/- being adhoc disallowance of expenses incurred on Kashish Construction are emanating from seized material. He admitted that these other disallowances are adhoc disallowances and for non-deduction of TDS under various provisions of section

TIGERS WORLDWIDE LOGISTICS PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (3)(3)(1) , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2001

ITA 3286/MUM/2022[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Mar 2023AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2001-02 & Assessment Year: 2008-09 Tigers Worldwide Logistics Pvt. Dcit (3)(3)(1), Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, 301, Sangeet Plaza, Marol Vs. New Marine Lines, Naka, Marol, Andheri East, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400059. Pan No. Aaack 4578 L Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Haridas Bhat, Ar Revenue By : Mr. S.K. Jain, Dr : Date Of Hearing 06/03/2023 : Date Of Pronouncement 30/03/2023

For Appellant: Mr. Haridas Bhat, ARFor Respondent: Mr. S.K. Jain, DR

TDS is confined to payments made to any "resident. On payments made to any "resident. On the other hand, section the other hand, section 172 operates in the area of computation of profits from 172 operates in the area of computation of profits from 172 operates in the area of computation of profits from shipping business of non shipping business